Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Hi, I live in Germany, I'm 30yo but want to start again playing piano, I did it for 3years when I was a kid.I'm looking for something cheap to buy, but with a decent feeling, I'm considering the Casio PX 135/130, Casio CDP120 and Yamaha P95.

I have mainly two questions:1) Whats the difference between the px130 and px135? Possible it's only about the two more instruments present? I could have both of them for the same price 490Euro (everything related to music in europe is more expensive).

2) What's the main difference between the CDP120 and PX135? I could have it for 380euro (so 110e less), If I'm a befinner does having less polyphony make any difference (I will never be able to play more then 48 sounds together for the first 2years probably)?

If I understood well the difference witht the yamaha P95 is only a matter of taste since both of them have pro and contro. In both case if I'm right I will need a midi interface where to connect the usb exit, there's no midi interface built in.

I did a lot of research on the types of digital piano you are talking about and decided to go for Casio PX-130. But it was not available in the shop, rather I got PX-135. I checked the manuals and details of both PX-130 and 135. I didn't find any difference between the two. The manuals are exactly the same. So, if you get PX-130 cheaper then go for it rather than PX-135. CDP-120 is also a good option. As you've said, 48 polyphony is just good enough. The piano sound source in CDP series is old though, but I can say that I'm not happy even with PX-135's gr. piano sound (all higher models of Casio DP lines uses exactly the same gr. piano sound source as privia) because I mostly concentrate on classical pieces. However, this is just a matter of personal choice. Also, in some review I saw people saying that privia's key-action is better than CDP's, though I'm not sure about this as I haven't tested CDP-100/120. I don't think it will be too bad, CDP-120 has much more good reviews than bad. But I can assure you one thing, Casio will be absolutely better choice than Yamaha P-95. PX-130/135 does have built-in usb-midi interface. It has one USB A-B type port which is simultaneously used for midi interfacing as well as file sharing. And connecting it to a computer and using it as a midi controller is very very simple. You don't need an external midi interface. But, Yamaha P-95 doesn't have a built-in midi interface.

I added to the possible options a Korg sp250, what about this compared to the PX135? If there would be let's say only 30/40euro of difference would you go for the Korg? Does it have an integrated midi interface? I'm wondering if the action is better.

Well, I'm always a fan of Korg. But the only obstacle is the price I tried Casio AP-220 (Celviano series) and Korg LP-320 side-by-side in a piano shop. Both the touch of the keys and grand piano sound of Korg LP-320 seemed amazingly better than Casio to me! AP-220 are costlier than PX-130/135 but the key-action and Gr. piano sound in Casio AP-220 and all privia DPs are same. Korg LP-320 is far more expensive than AP-220 and of course SP-250, but I think at least key-action and gr. piano sound is much better in LP-320 than SP-250. There are some important features missing in SP-250 compared to Casio PX-130/135, such as less polyphony (60 max. in SP-250), missing recording and splitting facility and most importantly lack of usb-midi interface. It's also almost twice heavy than PX-130/135! Here are some links you may have a look:Casio PX-130 vs. Korg SP-250Korg SP-250 specsMy aim was to get an affordable and portable DP. So, I'd always choose PX-130/135 rather than SP-250. But if I had enough money and no portability issues then I'd definitely jump on to Korg LP-320 (again not much impressed by SP-250).

I did a little research along these lines not long ago, and I'd encourage you to check out the P85 as well. It's the older model of the P95, I believe, but everything I've read suggests that they are virtually indistinguishable. Plus the P85 is cheaper. Beyond that, what you'll hear about trying them out and seeing what feels better to you. I personally found a huge, noticeable step up in the feeling I was looking for from from Casios to the P95. Others feel the opposite.

The Yahama also has only a single layer piano sample compared to the Casio and Korg SP-250 with limited dynamic range. Although the Casio sounds a bit overpronounced in the bass notes, the overtones are a lot more noticeable compared to the P-95. The other difference is the action. The Casio is heavier than the Yamaha P-95 which is a lot lighter. Some prefer the Yahama over the Casio or the Korg. All three models are solid choices in the sub thousand dollar digital piano category.

I agree that P85 may be a good choice too, it's little cheaper than PX-130. But according to some review I found that P85's key-touch is mostly soft which is not desirable. Whereas PX-130's simulation of heavy hammer action key-touch is more realistic. Anyway, as you have said, one must check out himself/herself which one suits him/her better (actually I also checked many shops in India and was surprised to find that all of them charged Yamaha P85 more than Casio PX-130! May be custom duties for Yamaha to ship in India are more than Casio.)

Yeah, you are quite correct. Though I'm not really bothered about the sound because most of the times I use some good grand piano VSTs which produce far more better sound than many high-priced DPs. For that I think Casio is the only choice because none of Yamaha and Korg SP-250 comes with built-in usb-midi interfacing. I only care about the key-touch which is of course better in Casio than Yamaha.

So... I went to buy the px135... it was sold... (I'm really disappointed, it was a good deal), the only option I have is to buy a px130 for the same price of the px135, or to buy a cdp120 for 110 euro less.

Could someone explain me if there is a big difference in terms of sound and action between the px130 and cdp120? I will probably miss the usb midi interface integrated.

I don't care much about polyphony, makes not much difference if you re a beginner.

The PX-130 uses a different sound source called AIF which has more polophony (128) that the processor used in the CDP-120 (48). The CDP-120 uses the AHL sound source which is the same as what is used in the WK-6500 and other Casio keyboards. I think the piano sample is better in the PX-130 as it has 4 dynamic layers compared with the dual layer in the CDP 120. That equates to more dynamic range playing louder medium and soft passages. It is based on how hard you strike the keys. There are more voices on the PX-130 than there are on the CDP-120. For playing piano the 48 note polophony is enough in the CDP-120. You could get dropped notes if you layer sounds but I doubt it would be very bad. I'm not sure if the action is the same on the PX-130 vs the CDP-120. You would have to play them and compare them.

The action of the PX-130/PX-135 has one advantage over the CDP series (or Korgs or Yamahas mentioned)... you can hit a key and then lift up just enough to let you retrigger the note without having to lift it high enough to actually silence the note first (if the pedal is not down). But honestly, for most players, especially beginners, it's not a crucial feature... and certainly, an action that feels better to your fingers that lacks this feature is preferable to an action that feels worse but has this feature! Always trust fingers and ears over spec sheets and feature lists.

As for MIDI, it's most convenient to have both USB and standard MIDI connections, but if I were going to have just one, I'd pick standard MIDI. It gives you the highest compatibility and least chance of obsolescence... the only downside is that you need to add a MIDI-USB interface to your computer, and most of them are up around $40, though some people have had luck with cheap $5 ones too.

If it's going to be stationery, the SP250 is definitely worth a good look, and I'd at least take it over any of the Casios, but it is heavier/bulkier. Other than that, personally, I'd take the P95 over the PX-130/PX-135/CDP-120, but it all comes down to what you like the sound of and what you like the feel of. And I wouldn't worry about polyphony either.

I needed an aditional digital piano for ocasional gigs or take on vacation. I had the same dilema wbonx has. I tried several pianos and finally bought the Casio PX-135 last week. I also tried Korg SP-250 and I really loved it (I liked even more than Yamaha P-155) but I finally decided to buy the Casio because of the lighter weight (19 kg vs 11,2 kg). Also tried Korg SP-170s, very cheap and lightweight, but the action, altough heavy didn't convince me. Of course, I also took a look to Yamaha P-95. I chose the Casio because:

- Casio's action is heavier. Yamaha's is very good and playable but very light to my taste (I'm used to acoustic pianos)- As another poster noted, Yamaha's sample is not taken on different dynamics, Casio's yes. For that reason I think Casio's is more expressive.

Quote:

1) Whats the difference between the px130 and px135?

I couldn't find any. I'm maybe wrong but I think they are basically the same.

Quote:

2) What's the main difference between the CDP120 and PX135?

I also tried that one. There are several differences. I don't think the 120's action is as good as PX-130/135's (less expressive, more difficult to control). Also the sound is not as good.

That's just my opinion. As always, it depends a lot on your taste. Try and decide.

Hello, I went with the P95 as my first choice awhile back over the PX330 and SP170. I had not tried the 130 at the time- it probably just wasn't at the stores I visited.

What I like about the P95 is I find the sound is thicker, I do like the action- if the Casio is indeed heavier I would like that as well - I did try the CDP120 this weekend and was pleasantly surprised by it and am considering that or a PX for travel type board.

One thing I must say is that lining out the P95 to an amp really isn't possible because it has headphone jacks and I really haven't read any good reviews of using those.

I find the decay on the P95 more realistic than the Korg for example, I find that the sound sustains more realisticly.

Again, this all comes down to personal taste.I do not however, find the lack of multisampling in the P95 to be a hindrance. I A/B'd it to eh YDP140 which has 3 levels and to be honest couldn't really notice a difference but that is just me.

Overall, I feel as though the Yamaha offers the most realistic experience based on the 1) action to sound, 2) decay of sound 3) dynamic reponse 4) Yamaha being a little darker and thicker

However, given that the P95 was under $500 I am doing heavy research on a second slab piano. Believe me, it was not an easy decision to make as I liked different things about the different brands.

Guys I just bought a px135 I found on Ebay for the same price as the other one!! (499euro). I'm happy, it should arrive next monday!Thanks to everyone for the advices... you have been extremely helpfull!

At the end it was a matter of taste betweeb the p95 and the px135, I preferred the last one cause of the integrated midi interface, heavier action, more dynamics, and I think it is really important what anotherscott was pointing out, the feature to retrigger a note without lifting and silencing it.Then seems that casio is also doing better in terms of using different samples to distinguish between different layers of pressure instead of increasing only the volume... in general my feeeling is that the piano has more feature (recording, splitting and layering instruments).Probably a yamaha would last longer, and they are more reliable in terms of quality but still... it's also true that the p95 come out earlier so maybe later this year there will be a new one, instead the px135 come out since few months.

Then seems that casio is also doing better in terms of using different samples to distinguish between different layers of pressure instead of increasing only the volume...

Yes, that is a difference... the Casio has four velocity layer samples, the Yamaha just has one. (I thought it might be two, but after further analysis and conversation with dewster, I've come to agree that it's one, just nicely finessed. It does involve more than volume adjustments, there is filter processing going on as well.)

Personally, I find the P95 sounds more "musical" to play regardless of the lack of velocity layers, but people definitely have different opinions about that! The important thing is that you find what sounds and feels good to you. So congrats on your board, I'm sure you'll enjoy it!

Personally, I find the P95 sounds more "musical" to play regardless of the lack of velocity layers, but people definitely have different opinions about that! The important thing is that you find what sounds and feels good to you. So congrats on your board, I'm sure you'll enjoy it!

Thats how I feel- when I am sitting at it I feel as though it is closer to realism than the others, I am still going to try out some more though. Perhaps at this point I am waiting for the next slabs to come out hopefully this year

Depending on what you want, i find the Yamaha a lot more realistic than the Casio's for regular play. Yamaha also makes Grand Pianos' and Casio doesn't. But it depends which would fit your style the best. I would try them all at a store or somewhere to see what you think of all of them yourself.

Digital piano companies don't sample very frequently. For example, Kawai uses the exact same sampling session for all 88-note sampled pianos, which is basically all of them. Of course, they encode it differently, take different layers, and do different processing. But the actual recording sessions they don't redo often.

If Yamaha works the same way, the P95 will come from not only the same piano but the same actual sampling session as was used for the P155. And it's the same sampling session used for almost all their other pianos. The apparent move to CFX sampling in the brand new AvantUpright is the first departure from that CFIIIS sampling that I'm aware of. Well, it's possible that they did a new sampling for all the AvantGrands, since they have that quadraphonic sound thing going on.

Yamaha leaving out vital features like sample layers and MIDI reminds me of other consumer product lines like cameras where features are omitted on low-end models that would be quite cheap to implement, only the manufacturer reserves these for much more expensive products with a substantially higher profit margin. In such cases a newer company can sometimes sneak up on them with more bang for the buck. It sounds like Casio have finally got it right with the stage piano the PX-3, not much more expensive than the PX-135 at all, and I've only heard good things about it. Of course you would have had to provide your own amplification...

reminds me of other consumer product lines like cameras where features are omitted on low-end models

Fewer features is generally what defines low end models.

Originally Posted By: Clavier_watcher

that would be quite cheap to implement

two layers requires double the memory (of some sort or another), all else being equal (i.e. same number of notes sampled, at same sampling rate and bit depth, for the same length of time), so it is not free to add, in terms of manufacturing cost

Originally Posted By: Clavier_watcher

It sounds like Casio have finally got it right with the stage piano the PX-3, not much more expensive than the PX-135 at all, and I've only heard good things about it. Of course you would have had to provide your own amplification...

The PX-130 (and I believe, the 135), PX-330, and PX-3 all have the same piano sound. That said, the only one of those models that I like personally is the PX-3, which has the best feature set for live performance, as well as the lowest weight, and the best set of additional sounds. Though personally, I still think the piano sound in the P95 is superior.